Search

Cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) lie at the heart of eukaryotic cell cycle control, with different cyclin–CDK complexes initiating DNA replication (S-CDKs) and mitosis (M-CDKs)1,2. However, the principles on which cyclin–CDK complexes organize the temporal order of cell cycle events are contentious3. One model proposes that S-CDKs and M-CDKs are functionally specialized, with substantially different substrate specificities to execute different cell cycle events4–6. A second model proposes that S-CDKs and M-CDKs are redundant with each other, with both acting as sources of overall CDK activity7,8. In this model, increasing CDK activity, rather than CDK substrate specificity, orders cell cycle events9,10. Here we reconcile these two views of core cell cycle control. Using phosphoproteomic assays of in vivo CDK activity in fission yeast, we find that S-CDK and M-CDK substrate specificities are remarkably similar, showing that S-CDKs and M-CDKs are not completely specialized for S phase and mitosis alone. Normally, S-CDK cannot drive mitosis but can do so when protein phosphatase 1 is removed from the centrosome. Thus, increasing S-CDK activity in vivo is sufficient to overcome substrate specificity differences between S-CDK and M-CDK, and allows S-CDK to carry out M-CDK function. Therefore, we unite the two opposing views of cell cycle control, showing that the core cell cycle engine is largely based on a quantitative increase in CDK activity through the cell cycle, combined with minor and surmountable qualitative differences in catalytic specialization of S-CDKs and M-CDKs.

Summary A defining feature of cellular growth is that protein and mRNA amounts scale with cell size so that concentrations remain approximately constant, thereby ensuring similar reaction rates and efficient biosynthesis. A key component of this biosynthetic scaling is the scaling of mRNA amounts with cell size, which occurs even among cells with the same DNA template copy number. Here, we identify RNA polymerase II as a major limiting factor increasing transcription with cell size. Other components of the transcriptional machinery are only minimally limiting and the chromatin environment is largely invariant with size. However, RNA polymerase II activity does not increase in direct proportion to cell size, inconsistent with previously proposed DNA-titration models. Instead, our data support a dynamic equilibrium model where the rate of polymerase loading is proportional to the unengaged nucleoplasmic polymerase concentration. This sublinear transcriptional increase is then balanced by a compensatory increase in mRNA stability as cells get larger. Taken together, our results show how limiting RNA polymerase II and feedback on mRNA stability work in concert to ensure the precise scaling of mRNA amounts across the physiological cell size range.

Despite the prime importance of telomeres in chromosome stability, significant mysteries surround the architecture of telomeric chromatin. Through micrococcal nuclease mapping, we show that fission yeast chromosome ends are assembled into distinct protected structures (‘telosomes’) encompassing the telomeric DNA repeats and over half a kilobase of subtelomeric DNA. Telosome formation depends on the conserved telomeric proteins Taz1 and Rap1, and surprisingly, RNA. Although yeast telomeres have long been thought to be free of histones, we show that this is not the case; telomere repeats contain histones. While telomeric histone H3 bears the heterochromatic lys9-methyl mark, we show that this mark is dispensable for telosome formation. Therefore, telomeric chromatin is organized at an architectural level, in which telomere-binding proteins and RNAs impose a unique nucleosome arrangement, and a second level, in which histone modifications are superimposed upon the higher order architecture.

Cellular growth control is important for all living organisms, but experimental investigation into this problem is difficult because of the complex range of growth regulatory mechanisms. Here, we have used the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe to identify potential master regulators of growth. At the restrictive temperature, the S. pombe pat1ts mei4Δ strain enters the meiotic developmental program, but arrests in meiotic G2 phase as mei4+ is essential for meiotic progression. These cells do not grow, even in an abundance of nutrients. To identify regulators of growth that can reverse this growth arrest, we introduced an ORFeome plasmid library into the pat1tsmei4Δ strain. Overexpression of eight genes promoted cell growth; two of these were core RNA polymerase subunits, and one was sck2+, an S6 kinase thought to contribute to TORC1 signalling. Sck2 had the greatest effect on cell growth, and we also show that it significantly increases the cellular transcription rate. These findings indicate, for the first time, that global transcriptional control mediated through S6 kinase signalling is central to cellular growth control., Summary: Using a novel system to identify cell growth regulators, we have discovered a number of factors that activate growth in cells in which growth is developmentally switched off.

The dramatic telomerase-dependent overelongation of telomeres in cells lacking Taz1 (ortholog of human TRF1/TRF2) or Rap1 implicates these proteins in restraint of telomerase activity. However, the modes by which these proteins regulate telomerase remain mysterious. Here we show that the mechanisms underlying excessive telomerase activity differ markedly between taz1Δ and rap1Δ strains. Despite allowing elevated telomerase access, rap1Δ telomeres are processed and synthesized in a cell-cycle-constrained manner similar to that of wild-type cells. In contrast, taz1Δ telomeres are processed with little cell-cycle dependency and recruit telomerase over an abnormally wide range of cell-cycle stages. Furthermore, although taz1Δ telomeres experience transient attrition mediated by replication fork stalling, this is balanced not only by temporal expansion of the telomerase activity period, but also by markedly increased recruitment of telomerase and its accessory factor Est1, suggesting that stalled forks generate robust substrates for telomerase.

Apoptosis is a mechanism employed by multicellular organisms throughout development as a means of eliminating damaged or otherwise unwanted cells. From oogenesis through fertilization and gastrulation, organisms use an array of cell- and tissue-specific mechanisms to regulate the apoptotic program in response to stress or developmental cues. Since cell death regulation is tightly interwoven with cell cycle and checkpoint controls, and embryos of the fly, fish and frog exhibit unique embryonic cell cycle regulation, it is of great interest to understand how early embryos coordinate these cellular functions.

B-lymphocyte-induced maturation protein (Blimp-1) is a transcriptional repressor that is considered to be a master regulator of terminal B-cell development because it is sufficient to trigger differentiation in the BCL(1)-cell model. Transcription of the c-myc gene is repressed by Blimp-1 during B-cell differentiation. In this study, we have explored the mechanism by which Blimp-1 represses transcription by using Gal4-fusion protein assays and assays in which Blimp-1 represses the natural c-myc promoter. The results show that Blimp-1 represses the c-myc promoter by an active mechanism that is independent of the adjacently bound activator YY1. Blimp-1 contains two regions that independently associate with histone deacetylase (HDAC) and endogenous Blimp-1 in nuclear extracts binds in vitro to the c-myc Blimp-1 site in a complex containing HDAC. The functional importance of recruiting HDAC for Blimp-1-dependent repression of c-myc transcription is supported by two experiments. First, the HDAC inhibitor tricostatin A inhibits Blimp-1-dependent repression in cotransfection assays. Second, a chromatin immunoprecipitation assay shows that expression of Blimp-1 causes deacetylation of histone H3 associated with the c-myc promoter, and this deacetylation depends on the Blimp-1 binding site in the c-myc promoter.

Xenopus embryos divide rapidly following fertilization. During this rapid period of cleavage, cell divisions are not sensitive to DNA replication or spindle assembly inhibition. Here, we have investigated the consequences of eliciting DNA damage in these embryos. We show that the rapid cell divisions are not affected by DNA damage. However, as the embryos reach the onset of gastrulation, they undergo rapid and synchronous apoptosis. We have investigated the regulation on this delayed apoptotic response to DNA damage. Next, we have reconstituted a DNA damage cell cycle checkpoint in vitro, demonstrating that all the checkpoint signalling components are present in the embryos but are not activated under the experimental conditions used to generate DNA damage in the embryo.

The prevention of nonhomologous end‐joining (NHEJ) reactions between chromosome ends is crucial for maintaining genome stability. Although this protective function is known to be fulfilled by a core of conserved telomeric proteins that are collectively known as Shelterin, its mechanistic details remain a mystery. In this issue, Sarthy et al (2009) lend fresh insight by developing an ingenious method to dissect the role of hRAP1 in preventing telomeric NHEJ independently of other Shelterin components.